Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

screamingracoon t1_je7f78b wrote

Reply to comment by FrenchManc in Lo Specchio, me, Digital 3D, 2020 by losbadhombres

Oooh, shush!

The issue is that this sub is constantly filled with low effort depictions of conventionally attractive thin women, not the nudity. They're all the same, with the woman who just stands or lays prettily and is there to be gawked at. It's boring.

21

FrenchManc t1_je7yw36 wrote

Low effort? Thin woman ? Conventional beauty? Just standing? Have you ever seen a renaissance painting? Nothing in your comment makes sense but I guess that's what growing up in a country without culture does to somebody. You're just confused, without references, and have no clue how much work goes into creating a piece like that, (you'll maybe know if you ever enter a conservatory or attempt to create anything related to art someday in your life instead of typing troll comments on the internet).

OP I hope you don't get discouraged posting here because of the few weirdos commenting, there are people whose disaproval should be encouraging more than anything.

−12

screamingracoon t1_je831qx wrote

Lmao are you really asking an Italian if she has ever seen a painting from the Renaissance???

Are you really forgetting that the Renaissance also happened half a millennium ago? And that we’ve already seen these naked objects over and over and over again? In fact, you speak French in your profile, so you should know that naked Venuses stopped being at the center of attention of the artistic world when people realized that Manet’s Olympia was far more interesting to discuss than Cabanel’s Birth of Venus.

r/art is constantly filled with objectified, naked women with semi-inspirational titles to cover for the fact that the nudity is nothing but a quick way to gather karma (which is also funny, considering that most naked paintings of Venuses in the history of art have been used and referred to as erotic paintings. The only difference as to why they’re better revered is because there is the added historical layer to them - and no, I’m not talking about Botticelli’s Birth of Venus, that’s another discussion).

Go home and study art history from the Renaissance onwards, because it’s very clear that you’re confused about it all.

11

FrenchManc t1_je855jb wrote

You just seem very rattled that some people enjoy painting or watching paintings of naked women and you never explain why, Even tho with your constant use of the word "objectified" (even tho you never explain how they are objectified) I think I have my opinion of why that i'll keep to myself.

Also I can see you tried to sneak as much names as you could remember because you got offended that I mistook you for a disney raised american but you trying to imply that erotism & beauty stopped being the driving force behind a good portion of all art ever created because "people realized that Manet’s Olympia was far more interesting" (????) is childish, laughable, and makes it impossible to give you any credibility.

−4

estastiss t1_je89y9t wrote

I can't believe you're serious, out of the top 100 posts in r/art, only 5 are NSFW. So if 5% of art offends you because of their subject, I think that's a pretty good ratio.

−5